tkeller

I'm a big fan of the whole Sixty Symbols series. For those of you not familiar: http://www.sixtysymbols.com/

There's also a "sister" site for chemistry: http://www.periodicvideos.com/

It's good stuff. I've enjoyed pretty much every video I've seen from both of them.

Pretty damned mild, really. "You guys are greedy and I disagree with you" != "you guys are breaking the law."

> inalienable right to re-entry as a citizen

Yes, for which he cites a trial court in Puerto Rico. Very convincing...

I'm not saying he's wrong, but isn't there binding authority on this point? Instead of just something that's only relevant *inside Puerto Rico"?

Call the ACLU and sue. At the very least, you'll waste some of the ACLU's time and money. (ducks)

Also important: understanding the difference between a patent application and an actual issued patent. The rule of thumb is that if it has a number in the millions, like 6,123,456, then it's a patent. If it starts with a year, like 2008/1234567, then it's an application. The slash may or may not be omitted.

It's both.

Why didn't you send them a letter threatening to bring a declaratory judgment action, then settle for a wad of cash?

I was kind of disappointed in this article. He starts off with "It's easy to write a loop which looks infinite but in fact completes quite quickly..." which makes it sound like he's going to write a loop that looks finite but in fact spins forever (maybe because of some trick like the integer overflow he uses at the beginning). That would have been interesting.

This is just trying to write a short program that'll run for a long time. Meh.

The question of who has the burden of proof does not turn on whether Facebook says it has questions or whether it says flat out that it's a phony.

    Facebook, which hasn’t claimed the alleged contract with
    Ceglia is a phony, has "serious questions" about its
    authenticity, Simpson said.

I don't understand this statement. If you're questioning its authenticity, aren't you implying that you think it's a phony?

Oh I didn't realize it was steel. For some reason I was thinking it actually was aluminum.

Why don't they just start anodizing that shit going forward?

> Seven satellites were destroyed as radiation knocked out their solar arrays or electronics.

Jerks.

That actually is a good way of highlighting the distinction.

You can make any claim look arbitrarily broad by omitting language from it. You cut limitations out of the middle with your "[...]", and you also cut stuff off the end without even mentioning that you had done so.

Might as well have said: did you read claim 13? "A computer system . . . ." OMG THEY CLAIMED A COMPUTER SYSTEM.

Here we go yet again. They did not patent "A networked computer system [that] provides various services for assisting users in locating, and establishing contact relationships with, other users." That's just the abstract. Gotta read the claims, people. The claims are what tell you exactly what the patent covers.

TL;DR: Here is an error message. It could be worded better, but I understand exactly what it means and where it came from. I'm going to get all offended about it, even though there was clearly no intent to offend.

Funny as a soundbite, but really apples to oranges.

This is absolutely not the case.

Yeah, this seems like an unbiased account. I bet there's NO information he left out of this story... Michael Arrington would never shade the truth.

"if David were to steal Goliath’s slingshot. . ."

I just don't even know where to begin.

"Sigh" is right. This isn't a patent. It's an application that hasn't been examined yet. Come on people, try to learn a little bit about the subject before trolling.

Change appft1 to appft in the url

Climategate 'scientist' attacks bloggers

It says it's a graph of "job loss." Negative job loss (= positive job gain) should be a good thing...